[mommy2fiveplus]

1st off: I am not posting this to offend anyone who has choosen domestic adoption, it is not what we choose but I realize it is right for some families and lately people have been getting offended on this forum and I have no intent to offend anyone.

I was at Target today. Our family is what I like to call "rainbow colored" and "large" being that we have 5 bio/adopts 2 current foster placements and everyone is under 6 years old and I am 26 and most people think I am younger. Needless to say, we get stares, we get comments, we get LOTS of questions. Since my two passions are foster care/adoption and Headstart I never let an opprutunity to advocate slip by. A lady asked me about the kids, you know the "are they all yours line", I said "sure are" and my boyfriend took all but the baby down to the toy department while we continued our conversation.

So I am talking about foster/adopt with her and she asks if the baby is adopted and I said yes, he was placed with us at 2days old and we finalized in June when he was 7 mos old. She says you and your husband are so lucky, and I corrected her (BIG MISTAKE), "he is my boyfriend, we have been together for 7 years, the girls are our bios and we adopted the boys together".

So she replies, "I didn't know they let unmarried people foster and they even let you adopt a baby when so many married couples who can't have children, want to adopt a newborn?" and she said it in the most snooty, disgusted voice she could muster.

Typically, I would respond to a comment such as this, however I was so frustrated we just left.

I get frustrated when people think that just because we are not married and happen to have bio kids that we do not deserve to adopt a baby. Firstly, we do foster care, it just so happens that we adopted children we had fostered, they came to us as babies, should we instead have said at 6 mos when TPR happened, "tough luck, you bonded with us, with worked through multiple medical issues and now you are a nice healthy baby and you get to live with some other parents because we are not worthy"? I think not! You know, three foster/adopt families turned him down prior to them calling us because he had prenatal drug exposure and no one really knew what the extent of his problems would be (now he is fine). Most of the people in our agencies domestic list would not have concidered him because he was mixed race, unknown familial health history, ZERO prenatal care and drug exposure. Yet I am supposed to feel guilty because some childless couple did not get to adopt him and I a lowely, unmarried, young, fertile girl did.

I am used to the suprised "you foster/adopt and you are not married" stuff, I chalk it up to people forgeting that not everybody shares the same values in reguards to marriage and that the separation of church and state(those in charge of foster) protects those who don't "go with the flow". But I don't think I have every had someone say it with such malice and disgust.

A single friend of mine adopted a newborn through foster and she got a lot of similar comments, it infuriates me.

Are there other people on this forum who have foster/adopt while unmarried or are we a complete anomaly? I mean we have been together for over 7 years and have foster for about 5 years, it isn't like we are skipping from one partner to another, I simply don't feel like I need to get married.

[vegaschristina]

My husband and I started out fostering before marriage, but we've (obviously by the husband comment) gotten married since. Sorry about the comments. I'm with you, I never pass an opportunity to advocate, but I've never been spoken to with malice.

[lucmarmic]

but I get it from my aunt. My uncle's wife ALWAYS commments on the choice I made to foster adopt. It is very frustrating.
But I just grin and tell her I wouldn't have it any other way, I love my girls.

[CaddoRose]

A piece of government paperwork does not a lasting/committed relationship make!

My Dh and I have been married 15 yrs, but we only did the legal thing because of his Dad who was 90 and DH was an only son. I figured I could put aside my strong disregard for governemnt intervention in my life and do it. I kept my name. DD has both last names. I actually refer to DH as my partner instead of husband.

[greenrobin]

Not that rudeness ever needs any defence, but I can tell you that the agency we work through will not license unmarried couples. It's against their policy.

I suppose that the woman thought it was against everyone's policy.

If you're stable and loving, more power to you. I don't think that having a spouse is a qualifying factor.

Congratulations on showing restraint!

[Kellster]

What amazes me most is people who think that marriage is a bigger commitment than having children! A marriage can be terminated with a simple piece of paper- parenthood is forever...

Kelly

[Hadley2]

I'm sorry you are upset. You and your boyfriend are doing so many wonderful things for your children and the children in your care. You deserve warm and kind thoughts and wishes and lots of community support.

I agree the lady's comment re being able to adopt babies when you have biochildren was poorly thought out and could be taken as rude. I think a lot of what we might take offense to in casual conversation, however, is based on our understanding the context of our lives so well when it really may be more than most people can take in and register in the moment. I doubt many people would think a child raised in a home from birth for a long time should be moved--they just might not realize that that is what they are saying in the flow of a totally new subject in a public conversation with a stranger.

Anyway, a few thoughts on the marriage issue occurred to me, I'd like to share, not to offend you, but maybe open a different perspective for you.

First, we are a secular nation. Marriage is a civil contract, no more, no less. Many people imbue it with religious purpose, and religious purpose may be more central to it for them, but that religious purpose has no legal or civil relevance. Not wanting religion or someone else's religion has nothing to do with not wanting marriage. Not wanting marriage is not wanting a legal commitment to a stable household.

"Them is us" said Pogo of government and civil society. We are social, communal animals whose offspring take a long time to raise. These are the mechanisms we have to facilitate our lives.

So, second, the purpose of civil marriage (whether SGBLTI) is to establish a stable household with joined responsibilities, liabilities, and commitments, especially for its helpless and defenseless "issue"--children. Its intent, and its overwhelmingly proven effect (by census data) even in this day of casual divorce, is to promote and legally warrantee the stability, responsibility, and permanency that benefits society and future generations (our children) by raising our quality of life emotionally, mentally, physically, and materially. By the numbers, people who are willing to commit legally to staying together are more likely to stay together longer than those who aren't. By the numbers, stable households contribute more to social stability and prosperity and less to social problems.

That is not to say that there are not good reasons for or higher benefits to individuals and society when some households disrupt or that the resulting new households are lesser than others. Just that, in general, stability promotes social health.

It is also not to say that some couples that choose not to marry do not have stability, responsibility, or permanency, just that they are less likely, by the numbers, to have that. Their legal and financial exposure for disruption of the household can be significantly less.

Third, just because they are unmarried, two adults raising children who choose to live together without legal commitment are not the same as one unmarried adult raising children. Two uncommitted people raises the potential for instability and disruption in the child's life in a way that one unmarried person doesn't. It just isn't the same.

So, fourth, to the person thinking of marriage as a legal commitment to a stable household, when two adults establishing a household aren't willing to take the risk of committing legally to each other and the household, their commitment to the children in it may seem to less strong as well. The personal intention may be there, but it is not backed up by a legal promise to keep the household together.

Given that we are dealing with children who desperately need a strong sense of stability and permanency, that, I think, would be the root of sentiments and policies against informally established households.

[All the more reason, (IMO), same-sex marriage should be legal everywhere.]

It would not have to have anything to do with a moral judgment of your personal worthiness as people or your goodness/badness. Just the simple fact that you have chosen to not back up your personal commitment to the household by taking the actual risk of a legal commitment.

Fifth, sometimes, often, households disrupt, married or not. That is very true. Adoptions do, too. But in my mind, and this is opinion, marriage and adoption are very much the same. DH and I lived together a long time before marrying. At that time, I considered our relationship as good as and as valid as our friends' marriages. There is no question in my mind, however, that the legal commitment--and risk--of marriage, at least for us and most married people I know, deepens and strengthens our attachment and commitment to each other. Same for adoption. We love fd/niece dearly and she loves us. But we know she really needs the affirmation of that love and real security in that commitment that adoption will bring and that it will deepen our attachment and commitment to her as well. I would never say to her, "hey, it's just a piece of paper, it means nothing." To her, it means the world.

So, those are thoughts on a different perspective. I wish you and your family happier encounters with the world and support the love and attachment you have for each other. Seven years is a long time, longer than many marriages, no doubt, and I wish you scores more years together.

[AngelArrow]

I think when it comes to the whole system itself everybody has different opinions and we all know that. If someone wants to be a foster/adoptive parent it should not matter what the background of that person is as longest the child/children are in good care with that person. However, to most people it does matter agencies and so forth, but as longest you are happy that is what should matter! Adoption and marriage are both different subjects, but both should be life long commitments.

[stevenstwin]

I am so sorry that you had to deal with that - it amazes me that people feel free to SHARE those kinds of opinions. She cn think whatever nonsense she wants, but to inflict it on you is just incredibly bad manners. But there's no shortage of ignorance out there! I have a gay friend who is the single father of a little girl. He had her through a private (and not paid) surrogacy arrangement. He's been told more than once by people he has shared the story with that Children's Services shouldn't have let him "keep" the child, or some variation of that! Even more commonly, people ask if he "lets" her see her mother, because they don't fully understand the concept of surrogacy. He told me he's tempted to make up some sort of lie for where she came from just to stop the stupid comments...I told him that no matter WHAT explanation he gives, there will still likely be stupid comments ;-)

[Synesthesia]

Oh, please. There are more babies and children out there who need homes than people to adopt them. Who cares whether or not people are married, as long as they love the kids, each other and have stability.

Though, there are marital tax breaks to consider. But, it's good to foster and adopt kids and provide them with the familly they need.

[Heyheather]

Some of these comments almost suggest to me that people think of children as commodities that should be equally distributed throughout society to those who meet certain "requirements". We have had a comment made to us that it isn't fair that we should have infant twins and a 2 yo when we already have 5 children.

[EZ2Luv]

You know some people have no tact or common sense. What you are doing is wonderful and don't let anyone tell you different. That lady must live in a cave because look at the divorce rate. Marraige is no guarentee to a happily ever after.

As long as you are happy and conent with your family, who care what anyone says or stares. Your children are well loved and cared for, you are a family and that is all that matters. You shouldn't have to defend that or explain. Grr some people are just plain obnoxiuos.

EZ

[Boulderbabe]

Yah, I'm gay. I get that all the time. You know, us gay people are good enough to foster emotionally traumatized kids and get them back to where they are healthy and happy........but when it comes to adoption, apparently, we're second-rate no-good parents.

Sigh. Thank goodness there are lots of people that know the truth!

[RobinKay]

Mommy, please feel empowered to NOT talk to these people. Your family is a rare and precious thing, don't give people the opportunity to make you feel bad. You are strong and good enough to care for these children--you can use some of that strength of spirit for yourself.

A quick calm smile and walk away--they'll get the message that their remarks are intrusive and personal (I hope!).

[mommy2fiveplus]

"the purpose of civil marriage (whether SGBLTI) is to establish a stable household with joined responsibilities, liabilities, and commitments"


"Not wanting marriage is not wanting a legal commitment to a stable household."

I am just as committed LEGALLY in our relationship than a married couple, all of our assets are joined (bank, mortgage, car titles) so we have the same liabilities responcibilites as a married couple. If he or I choose to leave the relationship, we would still be responcible for these bills as well as for our "helpless" children.

If I got married I would not be changing my last name, I have a professional license and besides I like my last name, I have grown accustmed to it over the last 26 years. My kids all have his last name (bios and adopted) because that is how we choose to do it, so that would not be changing if we did get married.

"So, fourth, to the person thinking of marriage as a legal commitment to a stable household, when two adults establishing a household aren't willing to take the risk of committing legally to each other and the household, their commitment to the children in it may seem to less strong as well. The personal intention may be there, but it is not backed up by a legal promise to keep the household together."

I don't think people who are married have a stronger committment financially or emotionally, nor do I believe that stability is predicated by marriage. I don't feel like we are less stable because we are not married nor do I see what the "risk" involved with getting married is. If anything there is probably more risk involved with not getting married but that doesn't matter to us since we feel quite secure in our relationship.

My biggest issue is not that people dislike that we are unmarried, annoying as it is, I am confident in my values and know that I have similar feelings about different situations (ie: I believe in forced sterilzation of serious sexual offenders) and that many people do not share that same value. The part that irritates me most, is that somehow a married and childless couple deserves a healthy INFANT more than we do, I question whether or not they would feel the same way if the child in question were an older, and less healthy (emotional,physical) child? Would that married, childless couple still deserve those children more as well? Frankly I don't think that she would hold the same opinion in that circumstance.

Marriage means a lot to some people and those people should get married if that is thier wish, marriage means very little to me other than an expensive piece of paper so I choose not to get married. Committment means EVERYTHING to me. I choose to be accepting of whatever means committment to others and really wish others would be open to other people's definition of committment.

I really appreciate everyone's support, I knew that I could find open minded and supportive people in my foster-care circle.